These peeved parents say Michele, as an actress who plays a high school student on a TV show watched largely by teen and pre-teen viewers, has a responsibility to their kids to keep things a little more buttoned up (emphasis mine).

A 'little more buttoned up' huh. Just like they do in the show.

Let me start by saying that no celebrity owes you or your kids anything. They certainly don’t have a ‘responsibility‘ to conform to your personal standards. These actors are adults. They are allowed to behave as such.

Some parents argue that celebrities that are popular with kids should act like kids themselves. It’s a misguided notion that appears to be used by subpar parents to cover for their shortcomings. Instead of monitoring their children, they expect celebrities to step in and raise their kids for them.

“I think Lea Michele is sending the wrong message. She plays such a ‘good girl’ on ‘Glee’ and a lot of kids look up to her persona. Then she poses very provocatively on two magazine covers which makes my almost-13-year-old son very confused and offended,” said New York mom Kim Trefcer.

How very interesting. This mother thinks Lea Michele’s character’s inappropriate infatuation with a teacher, having revenge make out sessions, and cycling through boy after boy after boy is ‘good girl’ behavior?

Remember, the earlier quote from the article said ‘Glee’ has pre-teen viewers, and this woman’s son is only 12 years old.

She goes on to express how much of a struggle it is for her to teach her poor innocent child right from wrong when evil 24 year olds show some cleavage.

I wonder if these parents allow their children to go to a swimming pool or water park. Both of these photo shoots show less skin than a child would be exposed to at a pool. I’m even willing to bet that some of these mothers wear bathing suits more revealing than Lea Michele’s outfit in Cosmo. What about the outraged parents who purchase or subscribe to Cosmo in all of its ‘best sex position for pleasure’ glory? Are they blameless? Of course, we could just use the picture from a ‘Glee’ episode above to point out that ‘Glee’ shows more skin in its episodes than Lea Michele does in Cosmo.

Author Cooper Lawrence says Lea Michele is ignorant to think she doesn’t have fans that are 11 years old. Is she also too ignorant to think that 11 years olds don’t read the sexually racy Cosmo Magazine? After all, every 11 year old needs to know ‘what oral sex position will give him the most pleasure.’

Here’s where things get fun for me.

If Cooper Lawrence is right, and there are 11 year old ‘Glee’ fans, if ‘Glee’ has pre-teen viewers, and if this concerned mother’s 12 year old son watches ‘Glee’ … parents are guilty of neglecting to monitor their children.

The simple fact is that ‘Glee’ is rated TV-14, and it spells out the adult situations depicted in each episode via a warning several times. Pre-teens of 11 or 12 are not supposed to watch ‘Glee’ anymore than they are supposed to read Cosmo or GQ. Yet these parents fault the actors for exposing their children to age-inappropriate material. It’s ok for your 11 year old to watch a TV-14 program that is chalk full of sexual situations, unwanted pregnancies, and adult language, but it’s not ok for the actors in that show to wear a dress that reveals less skin that the average swimsuit?

Hypocrisy is the cancer of the world, and these ‘parents’ are the worst example of it. It’s always someone else’s fault your child saw something, and never your own.

I understand though. Not looking after your child leaves you with a LOT of free time. How about focusing your outrage on something worthy, like this Tide commercial: